About your Search

20121128
20121206
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11
't believing the dreams are accessible to them. >> >> you mentioned mitt romney who until three weeks ago was the leader of the party. mitt romney going to disappear or does he have a continuing role? >> i hope he doesn't disappear and hope he has a continuing role. first of all, very few people have done what he has done, run for president and be the nominee of the party. >> and get crushed. >> that's not accurate. he got 47%. he won a lot of states. he didn't lose 49-1. he won places and has a lot of supporters. but he has been successful at life. and i told him this, too. mitt romney is a role model as a person, a father, husband, community leader. he has a lot to offer the republican party and our country and i don't know what that role is going to be but i'm excited because he has a lot to continue to contribute. >> one of the issues you will be talking about in the coming year is immigration and the big encilada is a pathway to citizenship. can that get done in the next four years? >> i hope so. i think it needs to be dealt with comprehensively but not in a comprehensive package of
people obviously done a lot. governor romney was a classic example i give away millions of dollars. >> what about special rates for capital gains, dividends, other things that particularly benefit the wealthy are in town? >> is the classic home break that benefits the very wealthy. they think is correct that they receive more than 90% of the benefits. people in the middle class get a little bit from the outbreak, but overwhelmingly, the majority goes to the wealthy. >> home tax loopholes alone can't solve the fiscal cliff even if you'd done been the biggest tax loopholes. they don't come close to fulfilling the deficit. how significant are these deductions when we look at their role in the big picture of solving the fiscal clef? >> they can be important, the goal is not to get rid of the budget deficit. i don't think anybody has a realistic hope of getting rid of the budget deficit and a lot of people don't want to get rid of the budget deficit. certainly, opinions differ. they can be a managing part of the deficit. >> do they play a role in negotiations and talks? there is a group
, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: mr. speaker, mitt romney weathered a storm of criticism late in the campaign after hurricane sandy for his earlier comments about privatizing fema and turning responsibility back to state and local governments. but during an era of fiscal restraint and global warming, it's high time that we start this conversation in earnest. how big do you want your fema to be? how generous your disaster relief payments and how much do you want to pay for it? in today's "new york times" op-ed section, there's an article that points out potential liability for flood insurance alone is $1.25 trillion. second only to the liability for social security. right now we have arguably the worst of both worlds. the federal government responds to disaster usually paying too much for the wrong people to do the wrong things. we provide federal money to put people back in harm's way and sometimes provide infrastructure to make future risky development worse. we often take remedial action, like for theifying beaches, a temporary solution, that can actually accelerate erosion
that was a vote winner, he wouldn't have put 86% of his tv ads. he ran a romney is a bad person campaign not look at how wonderful i have gotten the american economy. >> if it is on c-span -- >> you say here's what we want to do. we just elected a house which ran on the ryan plan. >> you are saying these are the reforms that we want. >> the president sits there and says what, because he hasn't put anything on the table that passes the lap test, hasn't put spending restraint. crazy democratic leadership, which for two years kept all the democratic senators from voting on anything. i want them to vote on something between now and 2014 because then they aren't coming back. >> if you are john boehner, speaker boehner, your proposal is -- your bright line is what? >> first of all, you want to have this conversation in public and whatever happens, you want it online. that gives you the moral high ground and allows the american people to focus on this. >> wait, what you are saying right there is a path to a deal, you're not saying they should go over a political cliff. you're saying they should fight fo
alike, including governor romney. it's time for us to act on those elements, to accelerate the reform. i note with no small amount of irony that the $716 billion that the republican ticket mr. romney and mr. ryan campaigned against the president on, paul ryan's budget included the same reductions and it's likely they will be in his budget that's coming forward. let's act on things that we agree. let's rebuild and renew america and find ways to save the money and puts on a path to fiscal responsibility that the american public needs and demands. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lankford, for five minutes. mr. lankford: in a few days we're going to have to resolve the fiscal cliff. eye roncally enough, something the house of representatives passed last may. in april set out a tax plan. in may passed a sequestration plan, went to the senate and said we're going to see you in the lame duck time period. we're in the lame duck and this had has to be solved. we have to solve the problem. the first thing is to define what the problem even is. it seem
rather than putting an overall cap on deductions, which governor romney had proposed in the campaign. and i tell you, the reason we did that, having considered it, and bill is one of the leading experts in the country on this question, if you limit deductions, it has a differential effect, particularly on charitable contributions, because for high income taxpayers, that cap on deductions will be eaten up by state and local income tax deductions and what you're doing is socking it to the charitable sector by putting a hard cap on deductions. we thought it was better to equalize the rate by going to a credit system. middle class and higher income people all get 18% deduction rather than a millionaire getting 35 cents on the dollar for a dollar of mortgage interest deduction versus a teacher who gets 15 cents on the dollar. we think that is unfair and unproductive and this is a way of equalizing that. >> that is the offer from the center for american progress. larry, maybe this doesn't meet your test and probably won't meet the test of house republicans as well. i will give you a chance
will have lunch at the white house with his former rival, mitt romney. governor romney will be in town meeting with paul ryan. before the president's comments, house speaker john boehner and other republicans met with reporters saying they're willing to consider new sources of revenue as a solution to avoiding the fiscal cliff but will not consider raising marginal tax rates. this is about 10 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. in going over the fiscal cliff -- going over the fiscal cliff will hurt our economy and hurt job creation in our country. republicans are committed to continuing to work with the president to come to an agreement to avert the so-called fiscal cliff. it's one reason why we believe that we put revenue on the table, as long as it's accompanied by serious spending cuts to avert this crisis. we believe that this fits the president's request for a balanced approach to this issue. and we're going to continue to work with the president to try to resolve this in a way that is fair for the american people. we all know that we've had the spending crisis coming at us like a
campaign, the president was attacked by mitt romney for having so-called cut medicare. what of course mr. romney forgot to mention is none of those cuts in spending in medicare cut benefits. when we did that we made sure that none of the reductions would come at the expense of american seniors who were receiving medicare. and the reason you could do that because there's enough savings to be had. you could get rid of some of the medicare mills, the replication of services and you get a ton of savings. that's what we did. as mr. waleds said, in his district -- walz said, in his district we have a lot of things we can learn from. we're willing to discuss on how to reduce spending on medicare, medicaid and so forth. what we're not willing to discuss in the first instance how you pay for deficits that were caused by things other than these programs. we didn't pay for these two wars in iraq and afghanistan. we didn't pay for the bush tax cuts that went heavily towards the very wealthy. and so why all of a sudden seniors in america should take cuts to their services and benefits they paid for i
's re-election. has been running millions of dollars worth of advertisements claiming that mitt romney's plans will raise taxes on middle class americans. this isn't true. romney promises precisely the opposite. in factcheck.org has called out democrats for repeated -- repeatedly debunked the charge. to paraphrase president clinton's d.n.c., it takes a lot of brass for criticizing someone for doing something you've done yourself. so before we get into the last punch line, let's go back to videotape. online it had a video that could be punched. it was president barack obama speaking. part of his quote says, i can make a firm pledge under my plan no family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase. not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax. not any of your taxes. the article goes on. this man's firm pledges aren't worth too much, are they? it's worth -- if only to marvel at the sheer hypocrisy. congressional budget office determined that millions of americans will bet socked by the obamacare mandate. 80% of whom are middle income citizens. ne
think. we've asked most americans. and by the way, people who voted for mitt romney will tell you, do not cut my social security and medicare benefits. they don't want that, and it's not because they're stupid or greedy, as alan simpson would like to make them out to be, it's because in this country retiring with some level of security is something that people have worked all their lives deserve in this country and something that should be a priority. mr. ellison: well, let me quote mr. blankfein of goldman sachs. he says, quote, you're going to have to do something undoubtedly to lower people's expectations of what they're going to get. the entitlements. and what people think they're going to get, because you're not going to get it. that's what he said. now, this gentleman is a c.e.o. of a firm that receives tens of billions of dollars -- ms. schakowsky: tens of billions. mr. ellison: tens of billions of dollars from direct money and indirect money through access to the fed at lowered rates and now has the -- ms. schakowsky: audacity. mr. ellison: audacity is the only word you can us
-pays in cancer screenings, no co-pays for deductibles. we're closing the doughnut hole. under the romney plan, because they're paying providers more, your co-pay part of that provider fee is more, so your co-pay and the deductible will be more. those are for people over 55. people under medicare would pay more under the alternative than they are paying today. if you're under 55, you got your $500 a month every month trying to make your health care. because the thing is, if medicare is saving money and the health care costs do not go down, then somebody's got to pay the difference. adding insult to injury to that you have corporate profits, dividends and commissions and everything else being stipended off. so you not only have to pay the health care costs. you have to pay enough to cover the corporate profits. and so that's where senior citizens would be paying $500, $600 a year more. ms. moore: mr. scott, let me see if i got this straight. under the affordable care act, we're asking that instead of having seniors pay more, you know, find themselves in the doughnut hole, that we ask pharmaceut
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11